The Congress and Administration spend three weeks almost nonstop debating eight days funding of the federal budget through tax increases on the rich. Not a word was spent on spending. At the end of the day, spending was INCREASED by $4 trillion over ten years. This is inexcusable considering the situation we are in. Rather than attack spending, Obama will next target some loopholes that the rich enjoy and are not available to the rest of the citizens. Obama is making it a point to attack the producers of the nation. This goes back to his days as a community organizer in Chicago.
We currently borrow $188 billion per hour, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Every year we have to pay the same interest as the year before PLUS the new interest on the current years borrowing. In FY2011 we borrowed 40 cents of every dollar we spent. In FY2012 which ended this past September 30, we borrowed 48 cents of every dollar we spent. See the trend here? Our Federal deficit is 1.5 times the entire federal BUDGET when George H. W. Bush assumed office in 1989.
We cannot continue to spend at these rates. The sequester that was so drastic that the Congress couldn’t possible live under would cut the budget by $1.5 trillion over 10 years, or $150 billion per year. This figure is only 10% of the deficit. Even if the sequester took place, we would still be racing toward bankruptcy at an alarming rate. I think we need a cut at three times the sequester, and that would only be a down payment of the amount needed to be stripped from the budget.
“Democracy means simply the bludgeoning of the people by the people for the people.” –Oscar Wilde
What really needs to be done is a complete overhaul of the federal budget. Every item needs to be tested to see if the country really needs the expenditure for our survival. If not, then it should be removed from the budget. Only items that are absolutely necessary for us to survive should be funded by the Federal Government.
The only way we can solve this problem with taxes is to tax all income, including the poor at such a high rate that citizens would have no money left to live on. This assumes that economic activity wouldn’t plummet when all the money earned went to Washington.
Obamas’ lack of knowledge in economics is really going to hurt the country in his second term. Surrounding himself with others who are on the same page as he is, Obama doesn’t have the braintrust needed to right the ship of state.
In a recent posting I stated the Syrian mixed chemical weapons would only last for 48 hours before they became unusable. This was incorrect. The weapons will last for various times depending on which chemicals were involved. Some of these mixtures could last up to many months.
Pennsylvania released a study on welfare. The study showed a woman with two young children who was on welfare and took advantage of all the federal and state programs would need a job that paid her $68,000 a year to equal what she receives in benefits. Items included cash welfare, the WICK program, food stamps, Section 8 housing, free cell phones and service, and other programs that benefit the poor. With this much going to the poor, how is the family of 4 making $50,000 ever going to be able to pay for the poor? I realize the poor need our help, but to what extent? Do we support the poor so they can better themselves or do we provide them with a better life forever?